< Back to front page Text size +

For the average buyer, fixing it up makes more sense than tearing it down

Posted by Scott Van Voorhis  January 20, 2011 06:52 AM
  • Facebook
  • E-mail
  • E-mail this article

    Invalid E-mail address
    Invalid E-mail address

    Sending your article

    Your article has been sent.

E-mail this article

Invalid email address
Invalid email address

Sending your article

Your article has been sent.

I'll be honest here, I have a beef. Every time I mention my Natick fixer-upper, I get bulldozed by some contractor on the comment boards telling me I should have torn it down and built a new house.

But it does bring up a larger question here. Is buying an old house, tearing it down and then building something new a viable strategy for the relatively average buyer in the Greater Boston market?

Here's what Jima had to say:

"Scott - Hopefully people have learned something from your project.I think that the lessons learned were pretty clear.
1. It does not make financial sense to do a major expansion of a fixer upper in this market.
2. It is more cost effective to tear down and rebuild rather than to remodel and expand a fixer upper.
3. It will cost more money and time if you use the neighborhood handyman to do the work rather than a professional building company."

Sorry Jima, but I don't think we are on the same planet.

Even fixer-uppers don't come cheap here in Greater Boston. ($225,000-$300,000 is the rough range, depending on the town.) While still relatively expensive, our local handyman specials cost less than the homes that need some work, but not a major overhaul, and the rare few that are in pristine condition. And of course, if you are talking about a decent sized house in an upscale suburb in great condition, well that's going to be priced well beyond what a couple pulling in, say, $150,000 a year, can realistically afford.

My wife Karen and I bought our then extremely dilapidated, two bedroom, one crumbling bath 1920s village colonial near Natick Center for $280,000 back in 2002, just as the home prices were starting to soar again. It had been on the market for $299,000, but sure, we probably overpaid.

For the sake of argument, let's say we had been exceptionally savvy first-time buyers and managed to haggle it down to $250,000, a huge if given the market at the time.

And let's just say it would have cost me $250,000 to build the house similar to the one I have now. After renovations and a modest expansion, my spiffed up village colonial has 1,800 square feet, four bedrooms and two full baths. I am sure this is Third World to some of my fellow Greater Boston homeowners, but it's enough for me, my wife and our three little ones.

OK, bear with me, it's now two years later and that old village colonial, which despite its many flaws had essential charm, is long gone. In its place, I have a bland, boxy cookie cutter home - all I could afford - and I am into it for $530,000. In the meantime, I have had to spend another two years renting in Quincy, racking up another $14,000 or more in rent. Now we are up to $544,000 - and we haven't even gotten to the lawn, which is a rock strewn mess that could double as a lunar landing site.

Unless I can afford to take time off and spend three months to play at landscaper - and I can't because my big mortgage payment is about to kick in - there's another $20,000 down the tubes.

Final price tag, $564,000.

Of course, that's not what we did. Karen and I bought our fixer upper, made incremental improvements for six years and then went all in back in 2008 on a major overhaul/expansion.

It cost us $200,000, but it was worth it. Given we put some substantial cash of our own into the deal, our new mortgage is now $412,000, far more affordable than if we had chosen the tear down route.

If you have a million dollars to spend on a new house, sure, buy a village colonial in Lexington and tear it down so you can build the nice new home you want. All I ask is that if you are going to tear down some charming but flawed older home, at least make sure your new house is not some monstrous looking box.

But the tear down play is mainly for the contractors - I count at least two nice looking older homes within a short walk of my Natick home that were torn down and replaced with townhomes during the bubble years.

The saddest was the run down but quaint Dutch Colonial around the corner that was selling for $350,000. It got scooped up by a contractor who built a pair of oversized town houses on the lot, each one selling for $700,000 or $800,000, from what I recall.

By my calculations, that represents yet another middle class family priced out of town.

  • Facebook
  • E-mail
  • E-mail this article

    Invalid E-mail address
    Invalid E-mail address

    Sending your article

    Your article has been sent.

About boston real estate now
Scott Van Voorhis is a freelance writer who specializes in real estate and business issues.
Rona Fischman is a buyer's agent who provides a look at the local housing scene, from basements to attics.
archives